Sunday, 3 February 2008

San Joaquin SC response to PB

The previous report about the Diocese of San Joaquin was this one.

The letter from the Presiding Bishop to the remaining members of the Standing Committee, and some initial responses to that, were linked at the end of the article.

Those remaining SC members have now issued a response. The official DSJ blog copy is available here, and another copy of it is here.

Dan Martins a former DSJ Standing Committee member, now removed to Northern Indiana, and who earlier made these comments, has recently commented about this on various other blogs and has kindly published this record of his comments elsewhere: More San Joaquin Flotsam and Jetsam.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Sunday, 3 February 2008 at 3:55pm GMT | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: ECUSA
Comments

'And in those days every man (sic) did what was right in his own eyes.'

Posted by: L Roberts on Sunday, 3 February 2008 at 5:39pm GMT

Fr. Martins inability to *admit his own responsibility* in creating the DioSJ MESS (nor to empathize w/ the faithful Episcopalian survivors there) is a FATAL blindspot in his capacity to analyze the situation (IMO). It's not JUST about the canons, it's also about "loving your neighbor as yourself"!

Posted by: JCF on Sunday, 3 February 2008 at 8:13pm GMT

Back in the days of the Reagan presidency, we used to say that the people in charge were either evil, stupid, crazy or some combination of the three. It is hard not to have the same thought about the people in charge in the Diocese of San Joaquin (& like JCF, I do not give Fr. Martins a pass on this).

Disclaimer -- I am a personal friend of Fr Tim Vivian who has been asked to assist in rebuilding congregations in the area that wish to remain in The Episcopal Church.

Posted by: Prior Aelred on Monday, 4 February 2008 at 3:08pm GMT

Hmm one resonates to Fr. Martins' reasonable tone until one tunes in, to a deeper - and unacknowledged? - hostility to historic Anglican leeway. Live and let live is a graceful part of our worldwide Anglican heritage as believers; yet when conservatives now apply it, it means let me live so that I can continue various sly-minded and often mean-spirited efforts to demean your alternative conscience, hinder your efforts to love your neighbor according to that conscience, and trash talk you and your alternative motives at every near future opportunity in our common church life. Toxic atmostpheres rise up like smelly fogs from this hidden church life agenda, across lefts and mixed middles and rights and far rights in our worldwide church life. Example: Bishop Iker in FTW will keep pushing until he either gets himself disciplined by the house of bishops, or gets everybody to stop ordaining women. He makes a mean campaigning use of live and let live, as well as agreeing to disagree. Because? He has to be holier than the rest of us?

Whether wildly or ever so mildly toned, this operative agenda called realignment (often spun as a holier than thou call to alternative Anglican believer repentance?) is a clear spin of what historic Anglican commitments - to live and let live or to agree to disagree - really call us to do across our differences.

Posted by: drdanfee on Monday, 4 February 2008 at 7:52pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.